*/
A Bill to strengthen data protection could strip back the right to confidential legal advice, the Bar Council warned.
Bar Chair Andrew Walker QC said the Data Protection Bill, going through Parliament, will give the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) ‘sweeping powers to access legally privileged material’.
He said: ‘The irony is that these powers are designed to give citizens more control and protection over how their data are used, but the effect will be to allow access to their legally privileged communications without their consent.’
Walker warned that the bill will undermine the right to confidential legal advice, protected by the common law and Articles 6 and 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
He said that imposing a duty on lawyers to respond to ICO demands for privileged information would place them in the invidious position of being unable to reassure clients they will be able to protect the confidentiality of information imparted to them.
The Bar Council also warned that the bill could let the Home Office ‘off the hook’ for making incorrect decisions that see people wrongly deported or detained.
It said the bill gives the Home Office a wide-ranging exemption from its obligation to tell people what data it has on them.
Walker said: ‘Making a Subject Access Request is often the only way for people who are in the immigration system to find out crucial information relevant to their immigration status, and even to find out the very basis for adverse decisions that the Home Office has already made about them.’
Blocking access, he said, will insulate the Home Office from challenges to its ‘notoriously poor’ decision-making.
A Bill to strengthen data protection could strip back the right to confidential legal advice, the Bar Council warned.
Bar Chair Andrew Walker QC said the Data Protection Bill, going through Parliament, will give the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) ‘sweeping powers to access legally privileged material’.
He said: ‘The irony is that these powers are designed to give citizens more control and protection over how their data are used, but the effect will be to allow access to their legally privileged communications without their consent.’
Walker warned that the bill will undermine the right to confidential legal advice, protected by the common law and Articles 6 and 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
He said that imposing a duty on lawyers to respond to ICO demands for privileged information would place them in the invidious position of being unable to reassure clients they will be able to protect the confidentiality of information imparted to them.
The Bar Council also warned that the bill could let the Home Office ‘off the hook’ for making incorrect decisions that see people wrongly deported or detained.
It said the bill gives the Home Office a wide-ranging exemption from its obligation to tell people what data it has on them.
Walker said: ‘Making a Subject Access Request is often the only way for people who are in the immigration system to find out crucial information relevant to their immigration status, and even to find out the very basis for adverse decisions that the Home Office has already made about them.’
Blocking access, he said, will insulate the Home Office from challenges to its ‘notoriously poor’ decision-making.
Chair of the Bar reflects on 2025
Q&A with criminal barrister Nick Murphy, who moved to New Park Court Chambers on the North Eastern Circuit in search of a better work-life balance
Revolt Cycling in Holborn, London’s first sustainable fitness studio, invites barristers to join the revolution – turning pedal power into clean energy
Rachel Davenport, Co-founder and Director at AlphaBiolabs, reflects on how the company’s Giving Back ethos continues to make a difference to communities across the UK
By Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs
AlphaBiolabs has made a £500 donation to Sean’s Place, a men’s mental health charity based in Sefton, as part of its ongoing Giving Back initiative
Professor Dominic Regan and Seán Jones KC present their best buys for this holiday season
Little has changed since Burns v Burns . Cohabiting couples deserve better than to be left on the blasted heath with the existing witch’s brew for another four decades, argues Christopher Stirling
Six months of court observation at the Old Bailey: APPEAL’s Dr Nisha Waller and Tehreem Sultan report their findings on prosecution practices under joint enterprise
Despite its prevalence, autism spectrum disorder remains poorly understood in the criminal justice system. Does Alex Henry’s joint enterprise conviction expose the need to audit prisons? asks Dr Felicity Gerry KC
With automation now deeply embedded in the Department for Work Pensions, Alexander McColl and Alexa Thompson review what we know, what we don’t and avenues for legal challenge
